Logical reasoning PrepTest 102 · Section 4 · Question 8

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
"Problem" - Knowing an ancient language is required to read an ancient document
"Solution" - Most ancient documents have been translated
Conclusion - Future ancient historians don't need to learn ancient languages

Answer Anticipation:
We threw "problem" and "solution" in quotes here because, while the argument falls into that pattern, it's a bit looser than the normal problem/solution argument.

Framed this way, however, we can see that, for most ancient documents, the proposed solution would be sufficient—these translated documents wouldn't require a scholar to be able to read the ancient language. But that's only for "most" of them—and the conclusion states that there is "no longer" a need to learn these languages.

As such, there's a jump from a weaker premise to a stronger conclusion. For the documents that haven't been translated, there might be a need to learn the ancient languages.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects the jump in logical force between the premise and conclusion. It's not always necessary to know an ancient language because most documents have been translated, but that suggests that there are some out there that aren't translated. For those documents, knowing the language might be necessary, but the argument concludes that such knowledge is never necessary.

Key Takeaway:
When an argument's conclusion is very strong ("no longer need"), check to see if the premises are equally strong (or stronger). If they're not, then you have a Weak Premise flaw.

Incorrect. None of the statements in the stimulus are treated as if they're opinions, so this answer is incorrect.

Incorrect. This answer describes a circular argument, but the stimulus uses the translations to support a conclusion about the need to know an ancient language. Those are distinct, so the argument isn't circular.

Incorrect. While the argument is about experts, it never relies on the opinion of experts. Also, the experts in question would be the ones with specialized knowledge of the topic at hand.

Incorrect. In order for this answer to be correct, the two premises would have to contradict each other. However, needing to know an ancient language to read an original document doesn't contradict not needing to know that language to read a translation of that document.